ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: I think it make sense with some level of name mangling from API symbols to linker names. First, it's good practice to use a single prefix for all linker symbols, while it's nice to use multiple prefixes for API symbols (mpz_*, mpn_*, gmp_*, ...). Agreed.
Second, and maybe you don't agree, I think it's quite reasonable for users to use the name spaces mpz_* and mpn_* for application functions working with the corresponding types. With some name mangling for gmp symbol names, at least that user doesn't risk collision with the internal gmp functions. That's indeed one of my motivations. And this *does* happen, it is not a hypothetical problem such as our invasion if the "implementation name space". Third, I think it's desirable if gmp and mini-gmp keep using different symbol names as seen by the linker. Agreed. But I don't think using a __ prefix on symbols is appropriate, it would be better to use the namespace gmp_* or maybe libgmp_*. I disagree. Any solution here is a compromise. And there are more drawbacks with dropping the __ than retaining it. Hmm, perhaps we could use the prefix iouyfvhbiqckbfgkuigblkiuyggggggcuyhfbg, to make things more clean? The risk of an accidental collision should be quite limited, and there is hopefully no paragraph in some standard document somewhere against which we would be in breach. :-) -- Torbjörn _______________________________________________ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org http://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
